Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!
GOP WOTUS PUSHBACK: A few Republican lawmakers are attacking the Biden administration for what they’ve deemed as lackluster rulemaking from the Environmental Protection Agency, after the agency issued a rule Tuesday curtailing protections for previously protected waters and wetlands. The newest rule was issued to align with the Supreme Court’s ruling that lessens protections for certain bodies of waters.
Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, called the new rule an “unserious approach” in a press statement released Tuesday.
“I’m disappointed this rushed rule lacks public outreach and real transparency, results in a definition that is at odds with the law, and will likely be rejected once again in the courts,” she said.
GOP Sen. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, another member of the committee, echoed Capito’s sentiment, calling it an example of “big government overreach,” and says that the EPA’s new rule “disregards concerns by farmers, ranchers, and small business owners across the country.”
Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, who also stands on the EPW committee, tweeted out his reaction to the new rule: “It is baffling how the Biden administration could take something so clear and muddy the waters by grasping for authority they do not have. Let it go.”
Spokespeople for these offices did not immediately respond to a request for comment clarifying where the Biden administration’s newest rule falls short.
The new EPA rule: The Biden administration’s newest rule would revise a previous provision finalized earlier this year regulating the “waters of the United States,” otherwise known as the WOTUS rule. The previous ruling expanded the Clean Water Act’s protections over wetlands and waterways. But the newest regulation, following the Supreme Court’s decision, would narrow the previous rule’s scope, and remove the “significant nexus test” from consideration – which clarifies that certain waterbodies, such as tributaries and wetlands, are subject to the Clean Water Act based on their connection to and effect on larger downstream waters.
“While I am disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Sackett case, EPA and Army have an obligation to apply this decision alongside our state co-regulators, Tribes, and partners,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement. “We’ve moved quickly to finalize amendments to the definition of ‘waters of the United States’ to provide a clear path forward that adheres to the Supreme Court’s ruling.”
The newly-issued rule takes “effect immediately,” bypassing the usual process of issuing a draft for public comment. The EPA reasoned that the SCOTUS ruling created uncertainty for the implementation of the law, and the agency was moving quickly “to provide clarity and a path forward consistent with the ruling.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling: In May, the Supreme Court scaled back the authority of the EPA to regulate WOTUS under the Clean Air Act, ruling in favor of an Idaho couple who sought to build a house near a lake, and argued the federal government had been overregulating small bodies of water such as wetlands.
The high court’s majority gave companies a freer hand to discharge pollutants and paved a way for developers to construct additional new buildings without receiving federal approval, leaving a strong indication that the rules established in January wouldn’t be able to stand.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers Breanne Deppisch (@breanne_dep) and Nancy Vu (@NancyVu99). Email [email protected] or [email protected] for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
IDALIA MAKES LANDFALL IN FLORIDA: Hurricane Idalia slammed onto Florida’s shores this morning as an “extremely dangerous” Category 3 storm, battering the state with ferocious winds, a deadly storm surge, and more than a dozen tornadoes contained in the storm’s outer walls.
Shortly before Idalia made landfall in the Big Bend region, police told residents to prepare for a storm surge of higher than 15 feet, which they said is “not survivable if you are caught in it.” The ocean surge pushed water to its highest recorded level on Tampa’s East Bay monitoring site, and early footage shared on social media showed major flooding in much of the region.
The Big Bend area was also hit by a rare extreme wind warning, which is issued in cases of life-threatening sustained winds of more than 115 mph, while nearly 12 million residents in central Florida remain under tornado watch. As of this writing, at least 265,000 residents remain without power, which officials warned could last for “days.”
More flooding is expected in Tampa, St. Petersburg, and Fort Myers as Idalia tracks up through Georgia and into the Carolinas.
EU RUSSIAN LNG IMPORTS REACH RECORD-HIGH: The European Union is slated to import record amounts of Russian liquified natural gas this year, news that appears in conflict with EU goals to reduce reliance on Russian fossil fuels and cut off funding for Vladimir Putin’s war machine.
According to a report from the nonprofit group Global Witness, Belgium and Spain were ranked as the second- and third-largest buyers of Russian LNG, behind only China. As a whole, EU imports of the chilled Russian gas were up 40% in the first half of this year.
Analysts said the imports break with the bloc’s stated goal of weaning itself off all Russian fossil fuels imports, including Russian natural gas, which it plans to do by 2027. It also leaves it vulnerable in the event that Russia decides to completely cut off supply without warning—much like it did with the Nord Stream pipeline, throttling supplies last summer before cutting them off completely.
“It’s shocking that countries in the EU have worked so hard to wean themselves off piped Russian fossil gas only to replace it with the shipped equivalent,” Jonathan Noronha-Gant, senior fossil fuel campaigner at Global Witness, told the Financial Times. “It doesn’t matter if it comes from a pipeline or a boat — it still means European companies are sending billions to Putin’s war chest.”
ORSTED WARNS IT MAY DROP U.S. WIND PROJECTS: Danish renewable energy company Orsted lost 20% of its market value today after officials said they could take a $2.3 billion impairment on three U.S. wind projects – and possibly walk away from them altogether, according to the Wall Street Journal.
“As we mature towards final investment decision, if the walk-away scenario is the economical, rational decision for us, then this remains a real scenario for us as an alternative to actually taking the final investment decision,” Orsted CEO Mads Nipper told reporters on a call. Orstead currently has eight U.S. offshore projects in the Northeast.
But Orsted isn’t alone in this regard: Other wind developers in the U.S. are also facing similar challenges, threatening the Biden administration’s goal of installing 30 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030. “The massive attention for offshore wind, including ambitious state and federal goals, are running into the hard realities of energy infrastructure,” Benjamin Salisbury, director of research at Height Capital Markets, told Bloomberg. “I think there’s a tendency for developers to think of themselves as the ‘good guys’ and be surprised when there are hurdles.”
FIRST-EVER GULF OFFSHORE WIND AUCTION WRAPS AFTER SINGLE BID: The Biden administration’s first-ever offshore wind auction in the Gulf Coast finished with a whimper yesterday, earning just a single bid of $6.5 million from Germany’s RWE, which won the rights to 102,480 aces offshore Lake Charles, Louisiana, before the auction closed. Two other areas offered up offshore Galveston, Texas, received no bids whatsoever.
Offshore acres are sold via auctions that can last upwards of days, depending on the level of demand and how much companies are willing to shell out to develop the areas. The fewer bids, the shorter the auction.
For context, an offshore auction for acres offshore New York and New Jersey last year drew a record-high winning bid of $4.37 billion, reflecting heightened interest in developing in the area in keeping with the Biden administration’s goal of reaching 30 GW in offshore wind power by 2030.
The paltry interest in the Gulf is partly a reflection of environmental conditions: The Gulf has slower winds, a softer seabed, and a six-month hurricane season that make traditional offshore wind development in the near-term difficult. Instead, these areas are likely to be used to generate green hydrogen.
Still, industry groups pointed out that the lease sale was never expected to generate nearly as much revenue as offshore acres in the Northeast, where there are stronger winds, fewer hurricane threats, and firmer seabeds to build on. NOIA president Erik Milito described the sale as a “key moment” in the continued growth in the Gulf of Mexico as a comprehensive industry hub.
“The Gulf is firmly established as a premier global offshore energy region, recognized for its low-carbon oil production, and today the region took a step to expand its energy portfolio,” Milito said.
“As the Gulf of Mexico continues its evolution into a broad-based and integrated energy hub, encompassing segments such as oil and gas, wind, and with future prospects of carbon sequestration and hydrogen, the opportunity for the first offshore wind project will be a marker for the region,” he added.
SCOTT’S SUPPLEMENTAL: Republican Sen. Rick Scott is demanding an immediate vote in the Senate on disaster relief – before Federal Emergency Management Agency funds are expected to run out in September.
Ahead of Hurricane Idalia’s predicted landfall, the Florida Republican said Tuesday that he would be introducing a package that aims to replenish FEMA’s shortfall of cash and grants the agency $12.5 billion – fulfilling the Biden administration’s disaster supplemental request made on behalf of FEMA. The bill would also include Florida and Puerto Rico-specific recovery efforts, which would provide disaster-loss tax relief to families affected by previous hurricanes that took place in 2022, and commits funds and resources to rebuild Florida’s military installations.
Scott says that as soon as Congress reconvenes next week, he’ll be introducing the bill and demanding an immediate vote.
“Unfortunately, while I’ve spent the months leading up to this storm fighting to make sure the federal government shows up, President Biden and politicians in Washington have been playing games with FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund and insisting that this critical domestic aid be tied to foreign aid for Ukraine,” Scott said in a statement.
The demand comes a day after FEMA said it would be implementing “immediate needs funding” for a recent slate of disasters – meaning that the agency will conserve funds to respond to the most critical needs of disaster survivors. FEMA administrator Deanne Criswell called on Congress to approve the supplemental request the Biden administration made earlier this month. As of currently, $3.4 billion stands in FEMA’s coffers – but this money is projected to run out in September in a record-breaking year for expensive disasters.
Will they, won’t they: Whether or not the bill makes it to the floor is entirely up to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. But the issue of a separate disaster supplemental could solve the time crunch Congress is facing with FEMA, amid a backdrop of House Republicans opposing a disaster supplemental that includes both funding to Ukraine and FEMA. Members of the House Freedom Caucus have previously signaled they would oppose any “blank check to Ukraine,” essentially dooming the paired supplemental in the House.
Will they oppose a separate disaster supplemental? The conservative caucus rolled out its demands earlier this month, laying out red lines that threaten to doom any bill that would force the passage of a ”monstrous, budget busting, pork filled, lobbyist handout omnibus spending bill.” But disaster aid was not listed on the conservatives’ outline of no-gos – possibly hinting that the separate supplemental could stand a chance in the lower chamber.
The Rundown
E&E News Record warm waters power Hurricane Idalia’s path to the coast
Bloomberg Hedge Funds Are Shorting Stocks That Biden’s IRA Was Meant to Help
